The federal judge who is blocking Trump’s efforts to deport Venezuelan gang members also played a key and controversial role in the Trump-Russia collusion saga as the leader of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court.

Judge James Boasberg, nominated to the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia by then-President Barack Obama in 2011, is currently engaged in an all-out legal battle with the Trump Justice Department.

But in his role as the head of the FISA Court he made a number of divisive decisions, including a slap on the wrist for a member of the FBI’s Crossfire Hurricane team, the appointment of officials who had defended the FBI’s actions during the Russiagate saga, the renewal of the FBI’s FISA powers, and more.

Trump invoked the 1798 Alien Enemies Act this month against Tren de Aragua, a Venezuelan criminal gang which Trump said “is a designated Foreign Terrorist Organization with thousands of members, many of whom have unlawfully infiltrated the United States and are conducting irregular warfare and undertaking hostile actions against the United States.”

The Trump administration sent three planes carrying more than 200 illegal immigrants from Venezuela to El Salvador, and Boasberg issued an order temporarily blocking the administration from using the 1798 Alien Enemies Act to carry out deportations. The judge also attempted unsuccessfully to stop multiple U.S. deportation flights from leaving the country.

“This Radical Left Lunatic of a Judge, a troublemaker and agitator who was sadly appointed by Barack Hussein Obama, was not elected President… This judge, like many of the Crooked Judges I am forced to appear before, should be IMPEACHED!!!” Trump said on Truth Social on Tuesday. “WE DON’T WANT VICIOUS, VIOLENT, AND DEMENTED CRIMINALS, MANY OF THEM DERANGED MURDERERS, IN OUR COUNTRY.”

Just hours later, Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts released a statement to some media outlets rebuking Trump.

“For more than two centuries, it has been established that impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision,” Roberts said. “The normal appellate review process exists for that purpose.”

It was actually Roberts who appointed Boasberg to a seven-year term on the FISA Court starting in May 2014. Boasberg’s federal court biography adds: “Appointed by Chief Justice John Roberts, he was the Court's Presiding Judge from January 2020 to May 2021.”

Chief of the FISA Court

DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz in 2019 found huge flaws with the FBI’s Russia collusion investigation, finding at least 17 “significant errors and omissions” related to the FISA warrants against former Trump campaign associate Carter Page. He also criticized the “central and essential” role of British ex-spy Christopher Steele’s debunked dossier in the FBI’s politicized FISA surveillance.

Days after Horowitz released his damning December 2019 report on FISA abuse, Judge Rosemary Collyer — the chair of the FISA Court just before Boasberg took over the next month — argued in a scathing opinion that “the FBI’s handling of the Carter Page applications … was antithetical to the heightened duty of candor.” She contended that “the frequency with which representations by FBI personnel turned out to be unsupported or contradicted by information in their possession, and with which they withheld information detrimental to their case, calls into question whether information contained in other FBI applications is reliable.”

Boasberg, as the top FISA Court judge, issued a March 2020 opinion ordering that “no DOJ or FBI personnel under disciplinary or criminal review relating to their work on FISA applications shall participate in drafting, verifying, reviewing, or submitting such applications to the Court.”

The judge added that “any finding of misconduct relating to the handling of FISA applications shall be promptly reported to the Court.”

Boasberg said that “the frequency and seriousness" of the errors found by the DOJ watchdog "called into question the reliability of the information proffered in other FBI applications." The judge said the government has been “acknowledging its deficiencies” and “undertaking multiple remedial measures” in response to Horowitz’s report and to court orders but also argued that everyone at the DOJ and FBI “must fully understand and embrace the heightened duties of probity and transparency” in the secret court proceedings.

Horowitz also released a follow-up report in March 2020 which found FISA application problems in dozens of cases besides the Carter Page scandal, with an audit stating that “deficiencies that we identified spanned all eight field offices” which had been scrutinized.

Boasberg ruled in response in April 2020 that the wide-ranging problems “provide further reason for systemic concern” about the FBI’s FISA process.

Despite these problems, Boasberg then signed off on the renewal of sweeping surveillance powers held by U.S. spy agencies in November 2020, according to a declassified yearly report. In a ruling made public in April 2021, Boasberg approved continuation of the NSA’s warrantless surveillance program, authorized under Section 702 of the FISA Amendments Act, for another year.

The judge’s ruling dealt with FBI analyst searches of information on U.S. citizens in emails and other data sources that the National Security Agency has collected. Boasberg approved the renewal despite finding “widespread violations” of the FBI’s rules related to handling and searching the massive number of emails and other intercepts collected without a warrant.

Despite improper searches by the FBI, Boasberg largely gave the bureau a pass, contending that many of the violations had occurred prior to reforms from the FBI being put in place.

“While the Court is concerned about the apparent widespread violations of the querying standard … it lacks sufficient information at this time to assess the adequacy of the FBI system changes and training, post-implementation,” Boasberg ruled. “Under these unique circumstances, and in the absence of evidence to the contrary, the Court is willing to again conclude that the improper queries described above do not undermine its prior determination that, with implementation of the documentation requirement, the FBI’s querying and minimization procedures meet statutory and Fourth Amendment requirements.”

An investigation by special counsel Robert Mueller “did not establish” any criminal Trump-Russia collusion.

Special Counsel John Durham’s 2023 report concluded that “neither U.S. law enforcement nor the Intelligence Community appears to have possessed any actual evidence of collusion in their holdings at the commencement of the Crossfire Hurricane investigation.”

The special counsel noted that “the FBI ignored the fact that at no time before, during, or after Crossfire Hurricane were investigators able to corroborate a single substantive allegation in the Steele dossier reporting.”

The FBI told the FISA Court in January 2020 that it was working to "sequester" all the information from the Page wiretaps, and then-FBI Director Christopher Wray testified to Congress in February 2020 that he was working to "claw back" the intelligence obtained through those warrants.

Members of the FBI have continued to abuse FISA powers.

A heavily-redacted opinion from the FISA Court, which was penned by Judge Rudolph Contreras (who succeeded Boasberg as the leader of the secret court) in April 2022, was released by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence in May 2023, detailing FISA abuses related to the FBI investigation of the Capitol riot.

The FISA Court’s 2022 opinion said the U.S. government told it about “significant violations” of the “querying standard” for properly accessing raw FISA information, including “several related to the January 6, 2021 breach of the U.S. Capitol” as well as during protests in 2020 following the death of George Floyd.

Boasberg also made a glaring error in March 2020 related to the basic facts of the Trump-Russia collusion saga — an error he was forced to correct after it was pointed out by the Washington Examiner.

Boasberg wrote in a FISA Court opinion that month that “although from the outset the applications acknowledged the likely political bias of the person who had hired Steele … information that confirmed the political origins of the Steele reporting was not.”

He then wrongly quoted a footnote in the initial Carter Page FISA application, writing: “The FBI speculates that the [person who hired Steele] was likely looking for information that could be used to discredit [Clinton’s] campaign.”

But in actuality, the FISA application had stated that “the FBI speculates that the identified U.S. person was likely looking for information that could be used to discredit Candidate #1’s campaign” — with “Candidate #1” being Trump, not Clinton.

A public affairs officer for the federal courts called it “an error that will be corrected.” And Boasberg acknowledged his “error” in a filing on the FISA court’s website. The order from Boasberg was then updated to accurately state that Fusion GPS — which had been hired by Perkins Coie — had been looking to hurt “[Trump’s] campaign” rather than “[Clinton’s] campaign.”

Letting a Trump-Russia figure off the hook

Boasberg, in his role as a federal judge, denied the Justice Department’s efforts to seek up to six months behind bars for ex-FBI lawyer Kevin Clinesmith, who pleaded guilty in special counsel John Durham’s Trump-Russia investigation — instead giving Clinesmith a year of probation, 400 hours of community service, and no fine.

Clinesmith admitted in August 2020 that he falsely edited a CIA email in 2017 to state that Carter Page was “not a source” for the CIA when the agency had actually told the bureau on multiple occasions that Page had been an “operational contact” for the CIA.

In Horowitz’s 2018 report on the FBI's politicized Clinton emails investigation, Clinesmith was also mentioned multiple times as being one of the FBI officials who conveyed a bias against Trump. In messages exchanged the day after Trump’s November 2016 victory, Clinesmith worried that “my god damned name is all over the legal documents investigating his staff.”

Other messages showed Clinesmith said “Viva le resistance" in the weeks after Trump's win.

Durham had argued that Clinesmith’s “deceptive conduct” related to the FISA application fabrication “was antithetical to the duty of candor and eroded the FISC’s confidence in the accuracy of all previous FISA applications worked on by the defendant,” and said his deception “fueled public distrust of the FBI and of the entire FISA program itself.”

But Boasberg seemed to defend Clinesmith’s deceptive FISA-related actions during his January 2021 sentencing.

"Mr. Clinesmith likely believed that what he said was true," Boasberg ruled, adding, "I do not believe he was attempting to achieve an end he knew was wrong." The judge claimed that "it is not clear to me that the fourth FISA warrant would not have been signed but for this error. … Even if Mr. Clinesmith had been accurate about Mr. Page’s relationship with the other government agency, the warrant may well have been signed and the surveillance authorized."

Durham had argued that Clinesmith's deception "fueled public distrust of the FBI and of the entire FISA program itself.” Anthony Scarpelli, then a top prosecutor on Durham’s team, had also argued that “the defendant’s criminal conduct tarnished the integrity of the FISA program” and that “the resulting harm is immeasurable.”

Clinesmith told the court that “I am deeply remorseful for any effect my actions may have had” on the FISA process even as he claimed that “I never intended to mislead my colleagues about the status of Dr. Page.”

But Boasberg lamented that Clinesmith had been “abused” and “vilified” on a “national scale” when the judge handed down his sentence, though he did acknowledge that the FISA court’s reputation “has suffered” from the ex-FBI attorney’s actions.

Clinesmith, who worked on both the Hillary Clinton emails investigation and the Trump-Russia inquiry, pleaded guilty to falsifying a document during the bureau’s efforts to renew FISA authority to wiretap Carter Page, who was an adviser to President Trump's 2016 campaign.

“Friends of the Court”

Appointments made by the FISA Court during Boasberg’s tenure also raised eyebrows, as he appointed David Kris and Mary McCord — both veterans of the Obama DOJ — to assist the court with FISA reform.

The federal rules surrounding the choosing of amicus curiae give the selection power to the FISA Court judges. Boasberg personally appointed Kris in January 2020 to be an adviser in overseeing the FBI’s implementation of reforms following the Horowitz report.

Kris, a former assistant attorney general with the DOJ’s national security division during the Obama administration, was a controversial choice, having spent most of Trump’s first term defending the bureau’s decision-making, including its use of Steele’s dossier to obtain FISA warrants. Kris also defended the FISA Court itself from accusations it hadn’t done its due diligence.

Kris criticized the FISA memo put together by Republican Rep. Devin Nunes and by now-FBI Director Kash Patel in early 2018. He wrote that the Nunes memo “tried to deceive the American people in precisely the same way that it falsely accused the FBI of deceiving the FISA Court” and claimed that “the Nunes memo looks even worse” when hundreds of heavily redacted pages from the Carter Page FISA applications were released in July 2018.

Nunes told journalist Sara Carter that he believed Kris was a “ridiculous choice” for the role.

Kris also claimed in January 2019 that the Steele Dossier “has held up quite well … according to the best and most recent assessment that I have seen” and was “properly taken seriously.”

He had also defended the FISA Court against criticism related to the Carter Page scandal in September 2018, contending that “FISA applications are subjected to exacting … and serious scrutiny” and “the FISA Court is not a rubber stamp.”

“If the FISC's goal is to hold the FBI accountable for its serious misconduct, Mr. Kris does not appear to be an objective-or likely effective-amicus curiae for several reasons,” Reps. Jim Jordan and Mark Meadows said in a January 2020 letter to Boasberg. “At minimum, the selection of Mr. Kris creates a perception that he is too personally invested on the side of the FBI to ensure it effectuates meaningful reform.”

Mary McCord was also picked to be an amicus by the FISA Court in 2021. Georgetown announced in April 2021 that “Mary McCord is proud to have been appointed as amicus curiae.”

McCord took over the DOJ’s national security division in October 2016, when the first FISA application targeting Page was filed, and McCord reviewed that FISA and subsequent renewals. 

McCord had testified to the House Intelligence Committee in November 2017 that she “did not have the authority to sign FISA applications” — but said she had reviewed an early version of the first Page FISA application.

“I do know that it relied on information from Mr. Steele,” McCord said, adding that “I hadn’t seen a dossier. In fact, I didn’t read the dossier until January of 2017, when BuzzFeed published it.” She also wrongly claimed Steele had been paid by Republicans before being paid by Democrats. In actuality, Steele was hired by Fusion GPS after it had been hired by the Clinton campaign through Perkins Coie.

McCord was also involved with the DOJ’s investigation into former Lieutenant General Mike Flynn. A review of the Flynn prosecution ordered by then-Attorney General William Barr found significant problems with the investigation. A federal judge resisted the Trump DOJ’s efforts to dismiss the case, and Trump ended up pardoning Flynn near the end of his first term.

McCord appeared on Yahoo News’s “Skullduggery” podcast in December 2019, where she said that “the key sort of talking points coming out of the White House and out of the White House’s is that the entire Russia investigation was politically motivated, and I think that’s been debunked at least in part by” the Clinesmith saga. McCord also criticized Durham as seeming “political.”

McCord had also helped file multiple legal briefs in 2019 and 2020 on behalf of the Democratic House Judiciary Committee as Democrats sought access to grand jury materials from Mueller’s investigation, with Politico describing her as one of “the legal minds behind Trump’s impeachment” related to Ukraine.

The Forrest Gump of Judges

Away from his perch on the FISA Court, Boasberg has also been involved in a long series of controversial cases.

Boasberg ruled in 2012 against the release of any photos or videos of the dead body of al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden, siding with the CIA that to do so would harm national security.

The judge ordered the release of nearly 15,000 Hillary Clinton emails in a 2016 ruling, but in 2017 tossed out a lawsuit brought by Judicial Watch which would have forced the State Department to search for more emails.

He also oversaw the review and release of memos that fired FBI Director James Comey wrote about his conversations with Trump.

The judge ruled in favor of Trump in a lawsuit in 2017 when outside groups were seeking the public release of the president’s tax returns.

Boasberg reportedly ruled in 2023 that former Vice President Mike Pence had to testify in then-special counsel Jack Smith’s January 6th investigation of Trump. The judge also ruled that year that texts and emails on Republican Congressman Scott Perry’s phone also had to be turned over to Smith’s prosecutors.

The judge oversaw dozens of cases related to the Capitol riot, which he has repeatedly referred to as the “insurrection” of January 6, 2021.

Family Ties

Boasberg’s wife, Elizabeth Manson, shared a photo on Facebook of a “Clinton-Kaine” campaign button and an “I Voted” sticker on the day of the November 2016 election, a review by Just the News showed. It was reported earlier this year by the Daily Wire that Manson “donated over $11,000 to Democratic candidates” over the years, including $3,000 to the Hillary Victory Fund and Hillary for America during Clinton’s 2016 campaign against Trump.

It was reported by Politico in 2010 that Boasberg “gave $1,000 to GOP House candidate Tom Liddy in 1999 and $750 to Democrats.”

Manson’s LinkedIn page lists her as the founder and board chair of Meadow Reproductive Health and Wellness starting in 2024, a review by Just the News showed. The organization is an abortion provider which offers “comprehensive abortion services” and “in-clinic abortions procedures performed by our skilled providers as well as abortion pills provided both in-person or by telehealth.”

Boasberg’s daughter, Katharine, works at Partners for Justice, where she “assists the national team with its growing body of capacity-building work in public defender offices across the nation.” The group says it aims at “helping public defenders protect people from incarceration and other criminal penalties.”

Emily Galvin-Almanza, the co-founder and co-executive director of Partners for Justice, tweeted  last week that “that was (rightly) quick” about Boasberg’s Venezuelan deportation ruling as she shared an article titled, “Trump Administration Live Updates: Judge Orders Halt on Deportations of Venezuelans Under Wartime Law.” She also tweeted in January 2020 that “I'm heavily against ICE, our current deportation practices, and the cruel, horrifying, fascist farce we're running in immigration court.”